The defendant is charged [in count __]
with sexual assault in the third degree. The statute defining this offense
reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of sexual
assault in the third degree when such person engages in sexual intercourse with
another person whom the actor knows to be related to him or her within any of
the degrees of kindred specified in the statute that specifies which relatives
are prohibited from marrying one another.1

For you to find the defendant guilty
of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable
doubt:

Element 1 - Sexual intercourseThe first element is that the defendant and the
complainant engaged in sexual
intercourse. "Sexual
intercourse" means vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse, fellatio or
cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex. Its meaning is limited to
persons not married to each other. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient
to complete vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse, or fellatio and does not
require emission of semen. Penetration, however, is not required for the
commission of cunnilingus. Penetration may be committed by an object
manipulated by the actor into the genital or anal opening of the complainant's body.

Element 2 - Knowledge of
kindredThe second element is that the defendant knew
that the complainant was related to
(him/her) as a (mother / grandmother / daughter / granddaughter / sister / aunt
/ niece / stepmother / stepdaughter / father / grandfather / son / grandson /
brother / uncle / nephew / stepfather / stepson). A person acts "knowingly"
with respect to conduct or to a circumstance when (he/she) is aware that
(his/her) conduct is of such nature or that such circumstance exists. <See
Knowledge, Instruction 2.3-3.>

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant and
the complainant engaged in sexual intercourse, and 2) the defendant knew that
they were related as <define relationship>.

If you unanimously find that the state
has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of sexual
assault in the third degree, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the
other hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt any of the elements, you shall then find the defendant not
guilty.
______________________________________________________

1
General Statutes § 46b-21 reads as follows: "Kindred who may not marry. No man
may marry his mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, sister, aunt, niece,
stepmother or stepdaughter, and no woman may marry her father, grandfather, son,
grandson, brother, uncle, nephew, stepfather or stepson. Any marriage within
these degrees is void." Section 53a-72a (a) (2) encompasses conduct occurring
between persons related by adoption as well as by blood. State v. George B.,
258 Conn. 779, 794-96 (2001).

Commentary

In
State v. John F.M., 285 Conn. 528, 549 (2008), the Supreme Court interpreted
this statute to apply "equally to both same sex and opposite sex sexual
intercourse between individuals who are related within the degrees of kinship
specified in § 46b-21." The Court also discusses the evidentiary requirements
of proving kinship. Id., 534-44. On remand, the trial court properly
instructed the jury that it could find that the defendant was the stepparent of
the victim through testimonial admissions. State v. John F.M., 110 Conn.
App. 181, 186-87, cert. denied, 289 Conn. 948 (2008).

Sentence EnhancerSection
53a-82a (b) provides an enhanced penalty if the victim is under 16 years of
age. The jury must find this fact proved beyond a reasonable doubt. See
Sentence Enhancers, Instruction 2.11-4.